Have the Orthodox ever interpreted catastrophes, especially military defeat, as God's judgement upon Orthodox lands for their infidelity, idolatry, heresy, etc?

How have events, like the Fourth Crusades and the Fall of Constantinople, been understood by Orthodox society?

Related question, are there any Orthodox Saints who are considered Cassandra, i.e., unheeded prophets know for portending doom?

Google the correspondence of the Orthodox patriarchs with the Scottish churchmen who were exploring union with the Orthodox during the first quarter of the 18th century. Google books has digitized an early English translation of their correspondence. In there the Orthodox hierarchy write that the Ottoman rule is a visitation upon them for their sins.

Have the Orthodox ever interpreted catastrophes, especially military defeat, as God's judgement upon Orthodox lands for their infidelity, idolatry, heresy, etc?

How have events, like the Fourth Crusades and the Fall of Constantinople, been understood by Orthodox society?

Related question, are there any Orthodox Saints who are considered Cassandra, i.e., unheeded prophets know for portending doom?

Google the correspondence of the Orthodox patriarchs with the Scottish churchmen who were exploring union with the Orthodox during the first quarter of the 18th century. Google books has digitized an early English translation of their correspondence. In there the Orthodox hierarchy write that the Ottoman rule is a visitation upon them for their sins.

I too would be interested to know if anything similar was said about post 1917 Russia.

Have the Orthodox ever interpreted catastrophes, especially military defeat, as God's judgement upon Orthodox lands for their infidelity, idolatry, heresy, etc?

Yes. The most famous example is the Fall of Constantinople. Many said that Constantinople fell because of the Union of Florence.

« Last Edit: November 04, 2013, 07:15:59 PM by Cyrillic »

Logged

"Who wants to be consistent? The dullard and the doctrinaire, the tedious people who carry out their principles to the bitter end of action, to the reductio ad absurdum of practice. Not I."-Oscar Wilde, The Decay of Lying

Have the Orthodox ever interpreted catastrophes, especially military defeat, as God's judgement upon Orthodox lands for their infidelity, idolatry, heresy, etc?

How have events, like the Fourth Crusades and the Fall of Constantinople, been understood by Orthodox society?

Related question, are there any Orthodox Saints who are considered Cassandra, i.e., unheeded prophets know for portending doom?

Google the correspondence of the Orthodox patriarchs with the Scottish churchmen who were exploring union with the Orthodox during the first quarter of the 18th century. Google books has digitized an early English translation of their correspondence. In there the Orthodox hierarchy write that the Ottoman rule is a visitation upon them for their sins.

I too would be interested to know if anything similar was said about post 1917 Russia.

Fr. Arseny, IIRC, laid the blame for the October Revolution in part on the failings of the clergy.

The Ottoman conquest of Constantinople is often blamed on the Union of Florence. (Allegedly, Mehmet II was going to give up. Then the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics celebrated Liturgy together in Haghia Sophia, and an angel came to Mehmet and pointed to a weak spot in the walls saying, "Attack here.")

But I haven't found a theological reason for every disaster. Usually it's just a general "for our sins," which is sort of based in Scripture. Reference the Song of the Three Youths in the Greek Book of Daniel.

Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt

If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.

Quote from: orthonorm

I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Military defeats resulted in the emperor at the time beginning the iconoclast controversy.

Partly so. There were some natural disasters at the time and there was a rumor that Leo, as a young man, had Jews and Muslims as friends who influenced him.

Iconoclasm was not an exclusively imperial movement. There were also several bishops, mainly from Anatolia, who possessed iconoclastic leanings, even before iconoclasm gained momentum. By and large, they were (rightly) offended by certain excesses with regard to icons.

Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt

If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.

Quote from: orthonorm

I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

So would my 11th-grade Theology teacher. "So, you think it might be a good idea to chant some Latin at the next class Mass?"

"Well yes, I think it might introduce my fellow classmat-"

"Well, you're not getting it- these are kids, they don't know what the heck mumbo jumbo's being said. This is just like your altar crucifix idea last week- and those are expensive. Now go clean up the chapel."

I recommend you order a book called "On Wealth and Poverty" by St. John Chrysostom. During the days close to his sermons, there were earthquakes and he speaks about God and disasters.

If you want I can type things out for you from his sermons, but it would be a lot of work and i am not sure about copyright for holy fathers... LOL

about other questions such as military defeats, as another pointed out an emperor turned towards Iconoclasm because he thought God was angry at the empire for allowing icons, since there were so many military defeats against the heathens who did not use icons. at least that is what some historians think

with the fall of the entire empire, sometimes it is blamed on the union of florence and the traitorous people who accepted it in order for a hope of secular protection, sometimes on the joint prayers in hagia sophia with the latins

I have also read though that the fall of the empire was already fortold in the city, such as a statue of Constantine pointed east, which tradition said the conqueror of Constantinople would come from the east and the moon would turn red. It just so happens there was a lunar eclipse during one of the days of the seige of Constantinople by the Turks

Generally I think in those times these occurances did seen to be happening by the will of God, including natural disasters. I believe as well that there disasters happened for a reason, although I will not try to choose one to believe. I simply believe it was God's will for these things to happen.

Today, generally more secular scholars and seminary professors do not really care for such explanations, but instead prefer a more scientific approach to these matters of history, to not say God was punishing this or that or showing this or that, but intead this event occured because of x y z historical circumstances. It just depends on who you ask